[+] serious ballot by Mr_SpleenAs of now, the number of people killed on the Hamas side has risen to over 800. These 800 people consist of 300 militants, 150 policemen, 400 civilians (including 260 children), and several unknown. Over 3500 on the Hamas side have also been wounded. Is that number justified when the number of civilian deaths outweigh the number of Rockets fired into Israel during the month of December(when the cease-fire between Israel and Hamas was broken)? Or when the total 800 Palestinians killed outnumbers the number of rockets fired into Israel "in the last six months" by 2 to 1?

Israeli troops also detained over 100 Palestinian civilians into one residential home without water or food. The next day the Israeli military shelled the property killing around a third of the civilian detainees, and denied Red Cross workers permission to respond to the area for another 24 hours, the injured did reach a local hospital, but it was too late for three more children who died only hours after arriving. Four more children, who lost their parents in the attack and left to fend for themselves, were refused help by the same Israeli soldiers who had killed their parents. These events have been confirmed by the U.N.

Welcome, You landed on Bestandworst.com! Please Vote on the ballot on the left!

^I know Hamas was targeting Israeli civilians, I think the first air strike was justified because of that, but a ground operation was not necessary.
And does Israel target innocent civilians? According to the 2nd paragraph, apparently so.

Voted : In betweenI don't think Israel targets civilians, but they do care more about their own civilians than Palestinian civilians. However, Hamas shares blame because of all the tunnels and booby traps near civilian homes and mosques, and for increasing Israeli fears for the future with rockets that are increasingly accurate and long range.

I'm not quite certain I know what I'm voting on in this topic. The main question you pose is asking if Israel is guilty of committing war crimes in Gaza. My feeling is that indeed they are verging on being guilty of that, if not so already. The topic question then asks are these just casualties of war or is Israel fighting drity. Which question are you seeking a yes or no to? Are they just casualites of war? Hardly. Is Israel fighting dirty? Not necessarily, but they are using poor judgement and excessive force. They've gone too far in my view.

^The first question at the top you could answer yes or know to. The last question is basically a different version of the first question. If you believed that these incidents are just to be expected casualties of war, you'd vote no, Israel, or some Israeli troops aren't committing war crimes in Gaza.

If you believed Israel or some Israeli troops are fighting dirty, i.e rounding up over 100 civilians and shelling them, you'd vote yes, Israel is guilty of committing war crimes in Gaza.

Mr_Spleen If Israel wanted to target civilians then the number of dead would be in the thousands in the first day.

^Maybe so, but some Israeli troops did intentionally target civilians in the second incident I talked about. The casualties in that incident outnumber the number of Israeli casualties, civilian and military throughout this whole conflict, by 2 to 1.

I'm not defending Hamas. But at this point in the conflict, the Israelis aren't defending themselves anymore.

^Because it was a military order. You don't shell a civilian building for shits and giggles. The Israeli military should've known not to shell it, and even if it was an accident up until that point, they should have allowed the Red cross in to help the poor people ASAP and at least directed them to the four orphans left to fend for themselves. They're at least negligent for the deaths that resulted from them denying the people medical attention and whatever happens to those orphans. What am I basing that on? First hand accounts confirmed by the U.N.

^ ^The U.N were able to confirm those incidents happened from Palestinian media footage and dozens of eye-witnesses coming forward with matching stories.

It happened, and I don't see how something like that could be all an accident. Someone in the IDF had to have given an order to shell that house, and they either weren't privy to the information that it was full of civilians put there by the IDF which means someone was privy to that info and decided not to tell the person who gave to order to shell the property, or everyone knew and decided there was nothing wrong with massacring innocent civilians.

The Israeli Military put those people there, the Israeli Military shelled, wounded and killed those people, and the Israeli Military held off medical personal who's job it was to respond to the incident. There is no way this was one big accident.

Without getting into specific cases, as I don't tend to count blindly on Palestinian reports, regarding Israeli military operation (As was proven for example in the "massacare of Jenin" that was inflated by the Palestinians and the international media, UN, etc. to 500 dead Palestinians, and after IDF's investigation, hard evidence showed that the number is 25) - I'll say that in wars, mistakes, accidents will always happen, and the IDF is committed to study and decrease the collateral damage caused by its actions, that are directed today on Hamas militants only. However, the side that is playing dirty is Hamas (and other radical Palestinian and fundemental islamic factions) - that by bringing the war into the neighborhoods, hiding and taking cover behind their own people, whom they pretend to protect, but on the ground, it's the innocent population that protects the militants (invulentarily), as human shields. These exact methods, of cynically exploiting international law, caused in the previous years to strech the allowed combat operations, to return fire in case you get shot from a civilian target - like school or mosque etc. The world acknowledges that there are criminals that will resort to such actions against a side that is committed to international law, and basic moral values - so that it allowed some room for sane manouvering within the law for such cases of combat.

The important thing to examine here is what should be the outcome of this round - if Hamas will succeed in its campaign, and eventually get Israel to cave to international pressure - to stop fighting - it'll be presented as a major victory for Hamas and the strong will of the Palestinian people - so for instance the Palestinians will get used to the idea that their role is to defend Hamas (as human shield) in latter rounds, rounds that will definitely come, once Hamas gets stronger, and force Israel to react to stop its agression. Instead this round should prove to the Palestinian people (which elected Hamas, after Israel withdrew from Gaza strip, which was depicted as victory for "the resistence" rather than for more peaceful approaches), that Hamas actually brought them misery, and cynically used them instead of protecting them as promised, and that the only way to achieve their national goals is through neotiation with Israel, and abandoning the resistance. That sort of message was largely missed by the Lebanese people, in the last Israel-Hezbollah conflict - but that was largely because of our inability to achieve decisive victory, but the international pressure was present and significant there as well.